that is it for tonight on "the willis report." thank you so much for joining us. it has been a pleasure. she will return on monday. have a great night in the fantastic weekend. ♪ >> less about an economic reboot and more about putting the boots to republicans. >> sincerely they have a fundamentally different vision for america, one that says inequality is both inevitable and just, one that says an unfettered free market without any restraints inevitably produces the best outcome regardless of the pain and uncertainty it holds on ordinary families. i say to these members of congress, i am laying them ideas, but now it is time for you to lay out your ideas. >> can't just be against something. we have to be for something.

charles: welcome them everybody. i'm charles payne in for neil cavuto. all we we have been during the president's talk about the econy. instead of saying he wants to work with republicans, he has been blaming and attacking republicans saying that they are the es holding a middle-class town. melissa frances on if the president is looking for the economy to pick up ford is looking t pick a fight. >> she says you cannot be against something, you have to be for something. how about being for the keystone xl pipeline costs. e talks about the economy and liticians. why don't we get behind some projects that could actually create jobs. keystone could create 20,000 jobs out of the gate. that is conservative. some people think it is 40,000. half a million barrels of oil per day would wipe out our need to bring in venezuela and south american oil. this is something that could create jobs and lower prices for americans. get behind that. charles: cell is feels to me as if you are now for my ideas yyur have any.

it is weird. >> his ideas are contradicting. on the one hand he gives us a obamacare which cares the heck of the small businessmen in the nation degrees 80 percent of the jobs. then he comes back and now he has a jobs plan, but to the public employees to work and to put the trade unions to work. that is not nessarily creating jobs in the middle-class. that is not. in fact, building the private sector. as a we are all about. the private secttr. why are we building that? charles: the idea of building, i think, also appes to politics. down in d.c., the idea of building consensus, building something where both parties can agree. visit the president has consistently on the attack on the attack on the attack. >> well, let's put a little finepoint on what you guys are talking about. the president does not really say that his opponents have no ideas. he says that his opponents are cynical, political and motivated

, and this patriotic. want to do things, he says, that are actively harmful to americans as part of an effort to defeat the president politically. so why don't we have consensus? why don't we have agreement? when you start a discussion pugning the worst, most tanis modems on your opponent how likely is it the you're going to have any substantive discussion? you are not a patriot, but let's talk about the budget. that doesn't happen. charles: you ran for office as republican. how does thamake you feel? you inherently as a republican don't like this country. you make poor people. you make the middle-class. only like 01 percent of peoe at the top. >> that's not me. >> he is saying that is the entire party. >> well, that is a very poor definition of the republicans. yes, took us off in a world of 1%. they took us down that road. the majority o republicans did

not want to play that kind of ball. because when you are in the private sector, when you have a day job and you learn the responsibility of not trying to find an excuse and to lay the blame on somebody else, when you learn that you are responsible and that you bring all of your elements of your personality and your ability to bear in order to get by in the private sector, then you can enter public -- charles: that is a word, responsible. people talk about redistribution of wealth. i'll is in the president's policies is a redistribution of responsibility. and hispeech this week was sort of an attack on capitalism a celtic is you cannot corol outcomes. if you are down the hall you would probably be me. >> i don't know about that. charles: what i think is so frustrating about the speeches that it was about politics and economics.

it was supposed to be about the economy. bright new ideas on how we would have more jobs. if you want to have more jobs, get out of the way of shale and fracking. that is a way tt make energy cheaper and put those jobs on parity, make t labor equation -akes sense because the energy is cheer. we can bring some of those jobs back. i talked to see as you do not have trained americans here in the u.s. it would like to partner with local schools and colleges increased the training in need toead what do we promote that, give them tax incentives. there are a thousand ideas out there to create jobs. why are we talking about politics? >> maybe that is just did. when i heard this week was sort of a greateshits, if you will, snippets from of the speeches we have heard before. the president could have done this, that the teleprompter as. amass show. right. the idea of was this really an economic speech, political

speech looking to the midrm elections? what do you think his real goal was? >> nighter. what it really was, in washington we talk about the outside in game. has been place successfully b presidents of the past. ronald reagan, bill clinton, and george w. bush. whenou go to the public. charles, have an idea. congress is blocking me. i want to do this or that. come witme and help me on stock this out of congress. the president claims that is what he was doing. j kearney and others said he will go talk to the american @%ople t rally them. what he was really doi was playing the inside out game. he went to other places to turn around and pick a bubble are and say reporters, shame on you. don't cover for the scandals. republicans, shame on you. you people in america and poor people. he went to other places to talk to washington. it was not about economics or

manufacturing. is what he thinks washington ought to be focused on. >> the follow through on those promises. charles: you just made reference. it seems tme that the president feels it can drive a wedge into t republican party. friction between the tea party, the rhinos, the old schooluys. i have notid more a more. is it possible that he can do that? >> you will get away withaying it. charles: and republican has an epiphany. >> the republicans had a nervous breakdown. they are in disarray. they have to get a new identity. they have to start to learn who they are. they have to engage other constituencies. there is no question about that. and obama will take a advantage of that because that is a way that they think. everything is political. how about doing the right thing for the american people.

expanding on our shale and our oil. how about creating more jobs by putting u some tariffs against chinese. charles: i for one just look forward to the speech for we talk about how great we are, for we have come and how we will go. thanks a lot. you're fantastic. tax reform sending a lot like tax hikes. the latest democratic bush to push taxes went up. first, snooping from this guy and going to your e-mail.

charles: the president is not caing it anything. the administration really does not have to determine whether the mess in egypt is a government takeover or not. we will just keep sending that country over a billion dollars in aid but. we need tout the funding. congressman, and i think we have to label something, and this seems pretty obvious that there was an overthrow the democratically elected governments. >> i think you're right. that is pretty obvious. if we have a proper size

government, one living within the law on following the nstitution this argument to be irrelevant. it would be much easier to say that no one should have any foreign aid and we should not conditiont. well, we will send the money which we have been doing for 30 some years and billions and billions of dollars. this discussion about was it or wasn't it, we're missing the point. we should quit funding these nations and trying to pick the good guys versus the bad guys because it always seems to end up badly and we are always switching sides. we put the bar again and dry mouth and get another election and then helped from -- throw him out. i would say this argument, quit giving the money away. charles: i have to say, it feels like there is no gratitude. the more money america gives the country seems like a more animosity that have. >> you cannot buy. besides, we don't have money.

we have to borrow it from somebody or printed. it contributes, you know. but it is a bit arrogant for the president to do what he is doing. we don't have the system that i would like. there are rules that he is supposed to follow. under the rul he is supposed to cut off aid. the solution is not going to be, if they do exactly as we what we would give you money. so often our fooeign policy has been thaway. i would like to see some day that we have a different foreign policy. charles: a large following. you just touched on something that the president. a sort of sens of arrogance with respect to rules that have been in place. this week we know that holder says she will go after taxes and they're voting system despite the supreme court ruling. we are seeing a tremendous amount of arrogance. whether it is an essay, irs. what is going on?

is this something that always happens? >> well, it has been happening for a long time. you could add to your list, ideas that the president announced today that he would not go to the congress. congress works too slowly and he will do the funding of all the necessary projects. it is lawlessness. first these programs are unconstitutional. at least they are supposed to pay a little attention to the congress. these executive orders are out of control. i would say it is not unique for this president. believe me. it is worse than ever before and continues to get worse. it is up to the people and the congress to rein is sen. they could if they wanted to, but theee is not enough backbar up their terrain in the presidential powers. charles: why would republicans allow this to happen. almighty, they will have that kind of power.

why else would they laid out for this? >> iis inbred in our system. there is complacency. for a long time people did not complain too much because there was enough money to go around. liberals g what they wanted, conservatives got their money to pass out around the world. now they realize we are on the verge of bankruptcy. people still trust us. they know it's coming to an end. this is why people are becoming more partisan. it is a mess. the egg knowledge man and the allowing of our presidents to a use these powers and act on their rounds. it has been around for a long time. charles: absolutely amazing. somebody better draw a line in the sand. d.c. might stir up trouble over there, but it is not afraid to snoop on people here.

new reports, demanding big tech companies handover your passwords. on the same day we are learning that the fbi has been using drone sun u.s. soil. former white house cyber is our, of fine line between snooping and security. what is that? >> i think that is one of the things in the post's september th or other we have to figure out. a problem as we hear all the time that what we're doing is legal, authorized under law. just because it is authorize number one the public do not understand or is going on. just as importantly it does not mean we should do it. that is the thinghat we need to start lookingt. figure out what we need in the new world of digital economy and then say how do we protect privacy, civil liberties, was a protecting the nation. charles: you talked about the public not being necessarily educated. it seems like cgress,

washington, has no clue what is going on. every time someone testifies it seem like it is a new revelation. are these programs, have they become so powerful that just one person can operate them without accountability to anybody else? >> and i don't think they are that compressed, but there has been a very select member of congress that have heard about these programs for years and know exactly of the wor what happens is we see the rest of the congress becoming more cognizant of our is being done, where is being done and what powers and the tories are being used. that is not what we voted for. to make it even more complicated we talk about this country. all the other nations in the world that don't have the same privacy controls and protections that we have. see what goes on with the rest of theorld because e-mails, passwords, everything you talk about, they are universal, all around the world, not just your. charles: i have to tell you, i

have equated this to a digal form of sp and frisk. everybody in america as a suspect. this is how we are being treated as citizens. all suspected of a crime and actively being invvstigated. >> that's correct. that's one of the things the center for democracy and electronic -- they are saying the same thing. wait a minute. in the digital world wishes to look at things like the fourth amendment, the first amendment, freedom of speech. not automatically figure somebody to sit through everything and see if we confine something wrong with it. charles: this is the big question. it t big, too powerful, can stop? have we crossed a rubicon? >> i don't think we have. i know from a public perspective we have not done it. we have not agreed to do it. it is importa that we have this discussion, not only in congress but on shows like yours to say wait a minute. what exactly is being done, how

is it being done and to is it being done to. there is another nexus. youook at the economic peace. much of the digital technology evolves around the united states. was in europe a couple of weeks a. the europeans are saying wait a minute. why do business with a u.s. company if we're going to have to worry about data or privacy. we will start shifting business to europe and other markets which then affects us not only from privacy perspective but also a business and economic perspective. charles: i have to tl you, economic, for it to the morality. a whole lot of things. let's not forget the constitution. thanks a lot. we appreciate it. you know, i have been getting a lot of amazing reactio to my special last night. a lot o your people seem excited to invest. today fewer of them are actually investing in our education. find out why more are getting out of college

charles: this is what happens when you keep sticking it to students. students ticket back. by notticking around a new report showing college enrollment fell 2%. high tuition is a major factor. tuition will keep rising as long as the government's keep writing cheap loans. this will be a good one. all right. this is all about money. >> well you know what, first of want to give kudos to mets daniels, president of purdue university, former governor of my home state. he froze tuition for two years. everyone should follow through. we want to give reasonable loans. they should be reasonable. also the university's need to tighten their belts.

charles: that is a good point. these universities, billion dollar endowment. gigantic campuses. professor sticking a year or two off to read a book. what is this all about? in the meantime they have more and more money. >> believe it or not if you look at the actualtatistics, there is more supply and demand then government. you have of real glut of 3-20- year old people coming in. they were applying to go to college which means more demand, prices go up. let me finish. after 2009 we started to see a decline. so there may be more said this in terms of -- >> zero the facts. here are the real important facts. the administrators are outnumbering faculty by about --

the reason why costs are going up for colleges across the country and gouging the middle class families because these afghan academics think their hotel moguls, real-este moguls, academi, acting like donald trump mamies and letting the hotels of business. that is the business model. they have seven figure salaries. you know what i say? these colleges are nonprofits. they are not supposed to be acting in their own private interment. demeans you curtail their salary. they should be backing exploding steadman that. they shod be guaranteeing it and then you bring that number down. >> you blame government. >> i am. >> were talking tuition outpacing inflation by 600. something average is. >> and al is going to come down. charles: famous last words.

how will that come down. the federal government taking of thetudent loan business. they pushed everyone out. and then they churn out loans. a look at the numbersf the month. >> we know the federal government mess up everything. is this to be taking over. they cannot handle this. it's bad. the problem is they are not reasonable. something reasonable. a year -- solyndra, all the waste. now there is no money left. [iudible conversations] >> cash for clunkers. that is what it was. that's how we work into it. here's the problem. student loan debt has tripled. that is a serious problem. it is ranked low. for the first time in the history of the country student -- students are entering colleges. they are exiting colleges in a really rotten job market.

the high-school education and engineerg. >> way to hide. charles: so many students to take these gigantic lines and don't even get a degree. you want to talk about getting out, what about the degree at all and you are still saddled with debt. there is also an implition that the president laidut pretty thick. take the loan. >> we might watch different elections. i didn't quite pick that up. here is the reality. you are absolutely right about the amount of debt. it is pretty grim. >> he also hit the american taxpayer. >> you have to come up with another way because if you take that away we are going to end up with only wealthy people going to college. >> they don't have a problem going to school. is the middle-class.

and exactly right. the administrive cost. they're looking like fat cats. that may bartending school. that's not my business. >> ultimately we are in some sort of agreement. colleges out of control. no accountability. no one er says anything bad about them. the federal government is enabling them. >>ou're absolutely right. the white house did talk about their is a chance he could forgive the debt. that was but a couple of years ago. charles: that was floated this week. >> that's right the backlash against colleges. you saw in rhode island, starting to charge for fire department and, service. if the colleges don't get a clue and fix their financial models and stop gouging the american people then they will see it at the local level. charles: we have to leave it

there. talking about your favorite topic. taxes just went up again. that's not stopping the government from time to take a government from time to take a gger i'm only 17, but i know about investing. beeve in something, buy shares in it, watch it grow. so...what if you could invest in the future? the future of kids? like a stock. not the kind of f stock that's about making money.

but a stock for social change. a whole new kind of investment called better futures. when you invest, it helps kids go to college. i could be one of the first college graduates from my family. thfirst philanthropist from my neighborhood. and if i'm the first, then maybe there's a second. and a third. believe in us, invest in us. watch us grow. my name is sydni and i'm your dividend.

charles: california now says it is looking to tap taxpayers for more money forcing private companies to take 3 percent of workers' pay that they will invest it

until they retire. sayi that this would be a disaster is eat to have you on the show but this is california. ofourse, it is a disaster be like this stuff. >> i don't understand it is like a time bomb ready to explode and the politicians are acts it again all viewers nationwide need to be as worried as we are about what is ready to happen. now we have a competitor to social security run by california, a bureaucrat these are the politicians who cannot keep debt at of the way constantly raiding one fund after another it is fantasy economics. charles: would you say to those of the lower end of

the economic ground? they may need help it is the responsibility of government? >> allowing the employee to have the option to invested in conservative stocks or whenever they want their force is the employee to be able to pay many give them one or 2% from a ridiculous low amount. they cannot keep up with inflation. instead of trying to grow the enomy, you have people fleeing california. we have a situation instead of creating the opportunity state but one where i understand except cifornia

is $127 billion in debt. $3 million per individual. the politicians are retirement fund, a $60 billion in debt and they believe they will manage the billions of dollars forked out. this is showing the unions are behind this to rescue the debt. charles: so this is a schemm to kl for this money? under the guise of low investment like a ponzi scheme? >> you got it. lough hall on the surface it is the expansion of the mistates' brother but it is much more than that. the winners are the politicianand bureaucrats

in calpers but the losers are employees and employers d individual freedom. charles: it is preliminary and a trial balloon but this will be the latest in greatest of california's. >> and it will be the model nationwide to say look we have ts program that will force the employees in what will happen is there will b competitors of social security in all progressive states. charles: my ponzi scheme is better ere in your ears. they say i will take money from you don't worry will get back as if they can't guarantee anything with their tracrecord. you guys are in trouble but we all are. i appreciate your ti.

believe better not this uld be yoko ono singing she sells life she is in pain.

charles: '03 and clause is way to the top and washington cuts down big oil and we have jonathan hoenig. too much confidence but amazon could be warnings about something else lose the seventh in the last quarter this man not be much better you hve been called the of wolverine of

economics. is this bad news for the consumer? >>. [laughter] bad news? charles: good or bad? it is good for the stock not too far from the all-time high but they are not resting on their laurels it is the dominant retailerr3 they are reinventing themselves with tom want -- hardware and dominance in the cloud that is why you see the stock do so well. charles: what about the conser? >> it is important to look at the big retailers chasubles point but wal-mart is the vastlyetter predictor of an amazon. amazon is a very select mix and very difficult -- different. they make the amazon kendall and sell stuff they use that

amazon kindle to shop on amazon there is so many directions a mess usher also their sales growth is really strong but not so much on the earnings. charles: and the family dollar, the dollar stores is that a red flag? >> because they are not thinking that the consumer will trade down? charles: that isot a great sign of confidence. >> it is time to stop worrying overall and tigers are spending. >> target, a wal-mart, they have been strong in consumer confidence is the markets of the all-time high not surprising is doing better moving forward. charles: people are not borrowing but whenever they had they spent veteran of that is od or bad for the

future. with tracking looking to regulate fracking will the war on oil ever stop? now going after halliburton. >> whether oil or natural gas that supports fracking it is a tremendous benefit to the consumers at large. just in the last few years the innovations of fracking have brought prices down 67% that is a huge benefit when the consumers are just trying to make money to feed their families. >> why is a justice department investigating fracking? antitrust plunging prices o gas lead into the investigation what really bothers me in the wake of

the irs targeting scandal going afterpponents of president obama i don't trust other arms of the obama administration not to seek opponents base of the political agenda we know this industry should hates fracking and is against it now the justice department is investigating? charles: they have to be very careful because fracking has been the economic godsend. if they mess around with that the only reason we're not an a recession if you take that away we're in a deep recession. >> it is energy production in general. there is so many energy resources available to power this country for word. smith is not the earth that we battle but the regulators that wt to make it as difficult as possible. charles: there will not be any manufacturing renaissance about cheap fuel

if you control that you control the world. x box says my man is expected to hit the slop -- break the slump. >> we have had some huge successes and huge flops in hollywood feels they're coming in to the rescue it cost $120 million to make but lone ranger white house down, pacific rim chlorite pd they costabile seven digit million dollars to make in the u.s. gross is under 300 million. charles: but you put your money on cue jackman? >> yes. charles: really action figure you still see. >> i tught trading stocks wes is dangerous but in the movie business it is far more dangerous when it to

$20 million? but i think it will do well he h a broad appeal if the old folks remember from their childhood plus the new consumer there's a lot of competition out there for movie dollars i think wolverine will have a great opening weekend. charles: a lot of people say the blockbuster model is dead. >> we always think the way of business will be invented >> but at the end of the day don't they want to make profits? >> 1.2 billion dollars. three words. "iron man" three. [laughter] charles: health care looking so bad those who are working on law are trying to avoid to be covered by the same law.

>> family doctors bowling about driving prices up a new study says they could go up as much as 20 percent that is the latest bad news for theealth care law. thank you for joining the show. i am shocked at some of the numbers this is big a lot of physicians are selling out. >> it is predictive of the two-thirds of the 1 million doctors of 2014 will be salaried working for a health care system so they cannot afford to be in a solo practice so the

structure from the affordable care act is to the gene for repayment so they are starting up and doctors have to join them. >> of course, the ada you will stick with your doctor will change radically and lower prices because economics 101 of last competition there is the higher the prices g >> theoretically thats to the hell scared never fit into that supply-side economics. it will be precarious i am anxious to see what will happen because there will be penalties if the quality goes down and with the accountable care like a decapitated payment if they use it up then that is the

end. they could be shooting themselves in the flood. we will see how that works out. charles: that is the risk they're willing to take because the alternative would be worse. >> there will not be all lots of fee-for-service is changing the way reimbursement is and solo practitioners are not making it any more. reimbursement fees coming down and they cannot afford malpractice and running the office. and these accountable care organization is what it is promoting so you have to be a part of it. in order to get reimbursed. chles: what people are concerned about is tre is a big difference between access to quality health care.

it sounds like there is already the numbers problem it will be worse if we can imagine. >> that is a good point. just because you have health insurance doesn't mean if you have access to care. what we find in massachusetts once the bet was covered there were not enough primary-care doctors that is the probl the affordable care act does noo address there is a predicted shortage of wood pigeon thousand doctors by 2020 on this we get more primary-care doctors involved it doesn't matter if you have insurance if you cannot find a doctor to take care of p.o. -- -- take care of you. charles: with the beginning of our political ideology there should be pushed back

and rethought? >> it is already starting to go in motion with insurance companies are already planning the products people getting insurae they are being told so it is probably too late to turn back but there was a former patient to did not get insurance and then had elvis ising couldn't get insured but for it to worke need a pool of healthy individuals to buy insuranceif you only pay the $95 penalty in on jittery first the law that says it doesn't matter if it doesn't make said they did not off see a person paying $400 just in case they might ashale pay the $95 penalty once and just wait. charles:hat is pure logic and we know that willhappen in.

we don't know how bad but there will be some ugly moments without a doubt. we appreciated. senator harry reid strikes again telling the republicans thereill be no reform until he gets $1 trillion of tax hikes

charles: what do tax hikes have to do with tax reform? everything that majority leader says he wants $1 trillion of new revenue as a starting point on the day when the rich was told to pay up telling a crowd in brazil have to bridge a gap of that have-nots. now we have the latest with the war on the rich. >> 18 carry reid should resign. [applause] >> i love how americans are

castigated when the government has blown the $1 trillion they have been hitting the middle class very heart they're the worst administration to oversee economic growth in the great depression. we a service sector jobs at minimum wage. to thank you could take $1 trillion more out of people's pocket that is not the way to go. charles: but the pope that he wants to go through the worst neighborhoods of brazil he was adamant about wealth. what do you make about that message? >> ibm not catholic but i love this guy. >> may i interrupt? >> give me $50 right now.

>>'' was i saying? >> i love this pope but catholic businesspeople who made the big fuss about contraception and obamacare how will they deal withthis issue have they paid their own workers? charles: the fact that i am a biness owner should put me in a better spot but to talk about the super wealthy that is the position but the fact of the matter is i'm glad we're talking about this because this was debated all year last year what is rich but those to create opportunities for themselves. >> i don't think anyone you are rich and i am for so give the the many. that is not right.

that is not the way that it should be they create the jobs and businesses that it is how they do not just hand over money that doesn't help anybod. >> as a practicing catholic i want to tell the pope listen american taxpayers are paying between 60 or 70 percent of the federal tax revenues with the mst aggressive income tax system this is not about spending wealth but creating wealth you do not do that by taxing >> we have a crisis of selfishness and individualism's year and have to be wealthy to be selfish i think someone sucking up government benefits all day long that is another forum. >> i don't disagree for one

second. >> but selfishness is when you look at people working in the same company earning five or 600 percent more and no trouble with e fact that person cannot supply a his family with food and have to go on medicaid. that is what he is talking about. >> those people should be paid well. >> they let people work in this business? >> that is capitalism. >> he is trying to unite this warehouse are some of the most divisive politicians ev reagan and clinton reached across the aasle to get bipartisan agreement it is striking

this president nobel pce prize winner is the most divisive president in recent history. charles: i thinkoth of you are in the same position they have to recruit more followers and in brazil and 90 percent of the people used to be catholic now is as 67 so you need a hard message but in america what is the president trying to accomplish? it feels like he is ripping us apart. >> apparently he could recruit enough dollars to still be president. you want to throw that out the window for some reason. >> he talks about washington as if it is separate from him. were you talking about? >> those guys sitting in the house of representatives not letting him do his thing. >> every second term president has to deal with dave opposite majority.

>> audience stayed you for yourupport it has been a fun two weeks a lot of people call and he mailed♪ lou: good evening, everybody. thank you for being with us. america creating new enemies in the middle east. key congressional committees have green light of the obama administration's efforts to arm syrian rebs fighting the regime. the obama administratio has been widely criticized for its lead from behind policies in libya, egypt, afghanistan. now providing small arms and ammunition to some of the 1200 different rebel groups that have been identified in syria. we don't know which groups the united states will arm, t we do know -- excuse me, we do kno